Comment by openasocket
9 years ago
> Given that the Supreme Court has already decided that "wedding cake makers" are part of critical speech infrastructure
They have? Source? And what's "critical speech infrastructure"?
9 years ago
> Given that the Supreme Court has already decided that "wedding cake makers" are part of critical speech infrastructure
They have? Source? And what's "critical speech infrastructure"?
> A baker refused to make a cake for a gay couple due to religious beliefs. Supreme Court will rule on the case in fall
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-gays-religio...
> And what's "critical speech infrastructure"?
That's the joke. If the government can force a cake baker to make a cake for a gay couple, why not force (excuse me, regulate) internet companies to provide services to those they don't want to provide service for? Surely, if your sexual orientation is a protected class as a consumer, your first amendment rights are moreso protected.
"No federal law requires businesses to serve all customers without regard to their sexual orientation, but 21 states have “public accommodations” laws that prohibit discrimination against gays and lesbians.
In 2012, he said he politely declined to make a wedding cake for Charles Craig and David Mullins, who had planned to marry in Massachusetts but then have a reception in their home state of Colorado. They lodged a complaint with the state civil rights commission.
The commission ruled that Phillips’ refusal to make the wedding cake violated the provision in the state’s anti-discrimination law that says businesses open to the public may not deny service to customers based on their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. The panel ordered him to provide wedding cakes on an equal basis for same-sex couples.
Phillips appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing he deserved a religious exemption based on the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech and free exercise of religion. His lawyers say he refused to comply with the commission ruling while his appeal proceeded."
> If the government can force a cake baker to make a cake for a gay couple, why not force (excuse me, regulate) internet companies to provide services to those they don't want to provide service for?
The government absolutely could, but there is currently no law banning discrimination of service against racists or ideology in general.
The notion of protected classes with regards to private (not government) discrimination is not defined in the Constitution, but rather federal and state law. The Civil Rights Act defines race, religion, and sex as a protected class. If you want the government to prevent private companies from refusing to serve racists, you'd need a federal law passed, so I guess call your local congressman.